Cameo Clips

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT/PROBATIVE SIMILARITY

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that sufficient similarities existed to raise an issue of material fact as to whether the defendants' movie 'Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story' copied from the plaintiffs' screenplay 'Dodgeball: The Movie.' Price v. Fox Entertainment Group Inc., 05 Civ.5259 SAS. In the Second Circuit, in which the district court resides, probative similarity is initially used by a copyright-infringement plaintiff to establish, through indirect evidence, the copying of original elements of the plaintiff's work.

Denying summary judgment for the defendants, the district court noted that 'a jury could reasonably find that the two works contain similarities that are probative of copying. Both works are superficial fast-moving comedies that spoof underdog sports films. Each work tells the story of a group of misfits led by the main character who forms an underdog dodgeball team, pitted against a stronger rival team of bullies led by the main character's nemesis. In each work, the underdog team decides to enter a national dodgeball tournament that awards prize money, which the team needs to save a business in distress ' The progression of the teams in each work is similar. ' Moreover, several characters that appear either in the Motion Picture or in [defendant Rawson] Thurber's earlier drafts share the name and certain characteristics of characters in the Thomas Work.'

The district court also found an issue of material fact existed as to whether Thurber had a reasonable possibility of access to the plaintiffs' work, 'given the evidence of the speed at which he wrote his screenplay, the timing of the appearances of certain similarities between the two works, and the relationships he had with [William Morris Agency] employees who either actually had access or had a reasonable possibility of access to the [plaintiffs'] Work.'

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS/ ARBITRATION AWARDS

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a district court's supplemental judgment that awarded a personal manager specific commissions due under an arbitrator's award that contemplated, but didn't cite, the amount. Robert Lewis Rosen Associates Ltd. (RLR) v. Webb, 473 F.3d 498 (2d Cir. 2007). An arbitrator had decided that TV-sports director William Webb owed his former manager RLR commissions from broadcast contracts renewed after Webb terminated his management agreement with RLR in 2000.

According to the appeals court: 'While the general rule is that a district court may not go beyond the scope of the arbitrator's award and calculate damages in the first instance, the parties here agree that RLR's contractually established fee is 10 percent of the gross consideration of any covered agreement, as found by the arbitrator and [originally] confirmed by the district court. When the arbitrator initially determined that the 2000, 2005, and 2006 Fox [network] contract renewals and the 2001 MSG [network] renewal were covered under Webb's and RLR's agreement (and correspondingly, that RLR was due a management fee should those contracts be renewed), he performed the primary and substantive step in reducing that portion of the award to a sum certain. Furthermore, in its affidavit supporting the motion for supplemental judgment, RLR asked for $106,441.72, plus interest, as its proper fees under those agreements. Webb, while contesting the district court's authority to issue any supplemental judgment, raised no objection to RLR's calculations or to the $106,441.72 figure. We therefore find it permissible that Judge [Harold] Baer [in the supplemental judgment] performed the essentially ministerial function of ordering an undisputed amount of damages, when such award was specifically contemplated by the underlying arbitration.'

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT/PROBATIVE SIMILARITY

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that sufficient similarities existed to raise an issue of material fact as to whether the defendants' movie 'Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story' copied from the plaintiffs' screenplay 'Dodgeball: The Movie.' Price v. Fox Entertainment Group Inc., 05 Civ.5259 SAS. In the Second Circuit, in which the district court resides, probative similarity is initially used by a copyright-infringement plaintiff to establish, through indirect evidence, the copying of original elements of the plaintiff's work.

Denying summary judgment for the defendants, the district court noted that 'a jury could reasonably find that the two works contain similarities that are probative of copying. Both works are superficial fast-moving comedies that spoof underdog sports films. Each work tells the story of a group of misfits led by the main character who forms an underdog dodgeball team, pitted against a stronger rival team of bullies led by the main character's nemesis. In each work, the underdog team decides to enter a national dodgeball tournament that awards prize money, which the team needs to save a business in distress ' The progression of the teams in each work is similar. ' Moreover, several characters that appear either in the Motion Picture or in [defendant Rawson] Thurber's earlier drafts share the name and certain characteristics of characters in the Thomas Work.'

The district court also found an issue of material fact existed as to whether Thurber had a reasonable possibility of access to the plaintiffs' work, 'given the evidence of the speed at which he wrote his screenplay, the timing of the appearances of certain similarities between the two works, and the relationships he had with [William Morris Agency] employees who either actually had access or had a reasonable possibility of access to the [plaintiffs'] Work.'

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS/ ARBITRATION AWARDS

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a district court's supplemental judgment that awarded a personal manager specific commissions due under an arbitrator's award that contemplated, but didn't cite, the amount. Robert Lewis Rosen Associates Ltd. (RLR) v. Webb , 473 F.3d 498 (2d Cir. 2007). An arbitrator had decided that TV-sports director William Webb owed his former manager RLR commissions from broadcast contracts renewed after Webb terminated his management agreement with RLR in 2000.

According to the appeals court: 'While the general rule is that a district court may not go beyond the scope of the arbitrator's award and calculate damages in the first instance, the parties here agree that RLR's contractually established fee is 10 percent of the gross consideration of any covered agreement, as found by the arbitrator and [originally] confirmed by the district court. When the arbitrator initially determined that the 2000, 2005, and 2006 Fox [network] contract renewals and the 2001 MSG [network] renewal were covered under Webb's and RLR's agreement (and correspondingly, that RLR was due a management fee should those contracts be renewed), he performed the primary and substantive step in reducing that portion of the award to a sum certain. Furthermore, in its affidavit supporting the motion for supplemental judgment, RLR asked for $106,441.72, plus interest, as its proper fees under those agreements. Webb, while contesting the district court's authority to issue any supplemental judgment, raised no objection to RLR's calculations or to the $106,441.72 figure. We therefore find it permissible that Judge [Harold] Baer [in the supplemental judgment] performed the essentially ministerial function of ordering an undisputed amount of damages, when such award was specifically contemplated by the underlying arbitration.'